Hadoop QA
added a comment - 03/Aug/12 21:15 -1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12539082/HDFS-3758.003.patch
against trunk revision .
+1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
+1 tests included. The patch appears to include 1 new or modified test files.
+1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings.
+1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.
+1 eclipse:eclipse. The patch built with eclipse:eclipse.
+1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings.
+1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings.
-1 core tests. The patch failed these unit tests in hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs:
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.TestLeaseRenewer
+1 contrib tests. The patch passed contrib unit tests.
Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/2947//testReport/
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/2947//console
This message is automatically generated.

Not really, HDFS-3634 doesn't modify this test, it introduces a new test that doesn't have this issue but it doesn't replace this test, so this test will still fail if the 5s timeout is insufficient. When do you think the HDFS-3634 tests will be sufficient to remove this TestFuseDFS entirely?

Eli Collins
added a comment - 04/Aug/12 23:57 This is fixed in HDFS-3634 . It just needs a review.
Not really, HDFS-3634 doesn't modify this test, it introduces a new test that doesn't have this issue but it doesn't replace this test, so this test will still fail if the 5s timeout is insufficient. When do you think the HDFS-3634 tests will be sufficient to remove this TestFuseDFS entirely?

Eli Collins
added a comment - 05/Aug/12 05:42 Actually looks like branch-1 will need 423, 856, 857, 858, 859, 860, 861, 961, 780 and 420 before it's up to speed enough for this change so can probably hold off on branch-1 for now.
I'll commit your patch for trunk, and let's follow up on the test timeout in HDFS-3634 . I suspect we can remove this test entirely and replace it with your new one.

Here's a little more explanation of the patch: -ononempty allows FUSE to mount over a non-empty directory. Since we previously had a bug which could result in the fuse mount directory getting full of junk, you can see why this is useful.

This patch also changes the way we run fuse_dfs slightly. Rather than running it in the background, we run it in the foreground, piping its stdout and stderr to java threads. This is the meaning of the -f option.

Colin P. McCabe
added a comment - 06/Aug/12 20:52 Here's a little more explanation of the patch: -ononempty allows FUSE to mount over a non-empty directory. Since we previously had a bug which could result in the fuse mount directory getting full of junk, you can see why this is useful.
This patch also changes the way we run fuse_dfs slightly. Rather than running it in the background, we run it in the foreground, piping its stdout and stderr to java threads. This is the meaning of the -f option.

Colin P. McCabe
added a comment - 06/Aug/12 20:53 Just to be clear, the reason for foregrounding fuse_dfs is so we can capture the log output, which we otherwise would not see. Not having log output makes debugging difficult, as you might imagine.